Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

I don't get on here too often, but I've been meaning to add my two cents on the question of who had Deanna's father flown in. My theory (purely speculation) is this:

When Brad was negotiating his contract, one condition he insisted on was that he did not have to 'choose' anyone. Not because he didn't intend to, but because he had good legal representation, in order to protect his businesses, and his attorney said "What if you don't want to choose someone?". And voila, they made that a condition. Then the attorney said, "what if you want to choose someone - what other protections do you want?" And Brad said something like, "well, depending on what level of committment I was making, I would want to ask the father first". And voila, they added the condition that if Brad did intend to make some level of committment, TPTB would have to arrange for Brad to have face to face meeting, at their expense, between Brad and father.

So those conditions went into the contract on Brad's behalf. Then, as was previously mentioned by another poster, "when Fleiss found out how [Brad] wanted to play it", Fleiss was none too happy. And furthermore (this is all conjecture, remember), those around the set had the feeling that 'something' had happened to cause Brad to back off so abruptly. Not knowing exactly what was going on, they nevertheless thought that something was, and they had no idea if it was a "breach event". In other words, had Brad met someone else, or contacted someone else, or dated someone else, and was that the cause of the about face, and what was the timing of that event, and was it a breach? Was it the kind of breach that could be very embarrassing to the Bachelor 'franchise', if you will, and potentially cost them future viewers, costing them advertisers, and ultimately leading to damages?

This thought process leads to this: When Party A (Fleiss & Co) believes that Party B (Brad) may be about to breach their contract, and Party A believes Party B's breach might cause money damages, Party A is well advised to live up to every single part of the contract, so that if Party B does breach or has breached, there is no way Party B can claim their breach was as a result of Party A's breach of some other aspect of the contract. Do you follow so far?

So, even knowing Brad did not intend to pick, TPTB decided to make him go forward with the FRC because contractually, they could, and they thought forcing him to do FRC might cause him to change his mind. I think there is no way Brad would have done FRC if he didn't have to, and this was Fleiss's way of playing hardball. I also think there was no way Brad was able to negotiate in advance that if he did not choose someone, he wouldn't have to do FRC. I just think FRC is such a core aspect of the show, that TPTB would never agree to a condition that the Bach could skip that. Maybe they'd agree Bach didn't have to pick, but FRC, non-negotiable, deal breaker.

Which brings us to the advice that Party A (Fleiss & Co) make sure there is no breach on their part, even if they believe Party B (Brad) is about to breach. Going back to the contract, they see that under certain circumstances, they agreed that they would bring in the father in prior to FRC. So, they decide, bring in the father. If Brad breaches, fine - but he can't say we didn't have the father here, so he didn't go forward, and he breached because we did. So they brought in the father to cover the bases.

All conjecture, of course, but just my thoughts on why Dee's father was brought in - which someone had asked me before, and I've seen the question tossed about, but have not seen this angle posted.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by babyfaceC;2752948;

There were no "negotiations" of a contract envolved. At the end of the interviewing and screening process and before Brad was officially picked, he was sent a contract many pages long that he was to sign and send back. TPTB had him sign the contract and then informed him about 5 days later. I would think they have you sign the contract first so they don't offer the role to someone and get turned down. By the time Brad was told he was the next bachelor, the contract was already signed and there was no turing back.

He never had a lawyer look over the contract.

With his "assets"? C'mon Babyface. That is just plain NOT believable.
And if you are or anyone else in business with him actually believe what you just said - I would REALLY worry about that fact if I were you. THAT is just too ridiculous for words IMO.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by murphytoo;2753266;

I am confused too. But no matter.

No disrespect meant, but all I can say in response to the assertion that no attorney and no negotiation was involved, is to paraphase a famous senator: believing that would require the willing suspension of disbelief.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by MsFroggy;2753410;

When one is in a hurry to secure one's place on the bottom rung of the infamy ladder, somewhere between Omarosa and one of those guys from "Beauty and the Geek", I doubt there's time to read bothersome fine print. I mean, I'd sign away my life without consulting a lawyer if only somebody asked me to be the next Bachelorette... if I were completely braindead.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by rileymeboy;2754518;

First of all, this doesn't seem to be the normal manner in which BFC expresses himself in his post. So, could it be Brad posting?

Regardless, of who posted..it was a low blow to Mr. Bell. He is not involved in this at all and had not visited us here at the fort until a few weeks ago. He has apologized to Brad..and seems to be very impressed with Brad's accomplishments without having a higher education. It was meant as a compliment, what Brad his brothers and BFC have accomplished has to be applauded. The manner in which things are said does make a difference or does that go just for what Brad says or does? There comes a time when you have to let go, Brad. Only you have an idea of what you may have already lost because of this.

Sorry for asking, but who is Mr. Bell? And in a nutshell, can you tell me what happened??? Thanks RMB, or anyone!!
In reading more I think I figured it out - Bettina's father? Wowweeeeeee if that's what Babyface wrote... I agree - doesn't sound like him - he's been pretty good about keeping his composure, even when slammed pretty good.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by babyfaceC;2755170;

I apologize if my half-hearted "mr. bell" comment was taken seriously. Mr. Bell's "character/role" on the show was one who seemed to look down on somone that did not have a "higher education". It is very probable that he was edited to look that arrogant and condescending in order to make that particular episode that much more juicy. He is probably an amazing man... He has to be to raise such an amazingly smart and beautiful young woman like Bettina... I was trying to be funny and have failed miserably again.

The last thing Brad would do on a night off would be to log onto my FORT account. I wouldn't allow someone to post under my name either...

Hahahahaha! What a fun night to log back in and catch up.

Even if you have talked yourself into believing what you just said Babyface:

it's times like these that I miss Iron Mike. Does "D...C..." ring a bell? Sorry, couldn't help myself - I miss him making me laugh...

Anyway, even though you might not admit it on your friend's behalf, I think...

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Hi murphy2 I love your posts.

I disagree with the point that the "father requested presence" was even brought up during the initial contract, even verbally. Nobody could have predicted who "the" father-to-be would be. The fact that many (including Brad) felt in love with Deanna's father et that the father being greek would reinforce the appeal of his presence during the FRC ceremony (as per greek tradition) could not have been predicted.

IMO Brad was so enthusiastic about Deanna after his visit to her family that he let abc think that if she was the one, he would want to have Mr Pappas' presence... perhaps abc overlooked the "if", but then again DeAnna was F1... Did abc know that Brad wouldn't pick anyone and force a proposition by flying the dad over? Or were they mislead by Brad into believing until the very end that Deanna was his pick?

Originally Posted by murphytoo;2752615;

I don't get on here too often, but I've been meaning to add my two cents on the question of who had Deanna's father flown in. My theory (purely speculation) is this:

When Brad was negotiating his contract, one condition he insisted on was that he did not have to 'choose' anyone. Not because he didn't intend to, but because he had good legal representation, in order to protect his businesses, and his attorney said "What if you don't want to choose someone?". And voila, they made that a condition. Then the attorney said, "what if you want to choose someone - what other protections do you want?" And Brad said something like, "well, depending on what level of committment I was making, I would want to ask the father first". And voila, they added the condition that if Brad did intend to make some level of committment, TPTB would have to arrange for Brad to have face to face meeting, at their expense, between Brad and father.

So those conditions went into the contract on Brad's behalf. Then, as was previously mentioned by another poster, "when Fleiss found out how [Brad] wanted to play it", Fleiss was none too happy. And furthermore (this is all conjecture, remember), those around the set had the feeling that 'something' had happened to cause Brad to back off so abruptly. Not knowing exactly what was going on, they nevertheless thought that something was, and they had no idea if it was a "breach event". In other words, had Brad met someone else, or contacted someone else, or dated someone else, and was that the cause of the about face, and what was the timing of that event, and was it a breach? Was it the kind of breach that could be very embarrassing to the Bachelor 'franchise', if you will, and potentially cost them future viewers, costing them advertisers, and ultimately leading to damages?

This thought process leads to this: When Party A (Fleiss & Co) believes that Party B (Brad) may be about to breach their contract, and Party A believes Party B's breach might cause money damages, Party A is well advised to live up to every single part of the contract, so that if Party B does breach or has breached, there is no way Party B can claim their breach was as a result of Party A's breach of some other aspect of the contract. Do you follow so far?

So, even knowing Brad did not intend to pick, TPTB decided to make him go forward with the FRC because contractually, they could, and they thought forcing him to do FRC might cause him to change his mind. I think there is no way Brad would have done FRC if he didn't have to, and this was Fleiss's way of playing hardball. I also think there was no way Brad was able to negotiate in advance that if he did not choose someone, he wouldn't have to do FRC. I just think FRC is such a core aspect of the show, that TPTB would never agree to a condition that the Bach could skip that. Maybe they'd agree Bach didn't have to pick, but FRC, non-negotiable, deal breaker.

Which brings us to the advice that Party A (Fleiss & Co) make sure there is no breach on their part, even if they believe Party B (Brad) is about to breach. Going back to the contract, they see that under certain circumstances, they agreed that they would bring in the father in prior to FRC. So, they decide, bring in the father. If Brad breaches, fine - but he can't say we didn't have the father here, so he didn't go forward, and he breached because we did. So they brought in the father to cover the bases.

All conjecture, of course, but just my thoughts on why Dee's father was brought in - which someone had asked me before, and I've seen the question tossed about, but have not seen this angle posted.

Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11

Originally Posted by boomer_lady;2758995;

Hi murphy2 I love your posts.

I disagree with the point that the "father requested presence" was even brought up during the initial contract, even verbally. Nobody could have predicted who "the" father-to-be would be. The fact that many (including Brad) felt in love with Deanna's father et that the father being greek would reinforce the appeal of his presence during the FRC ceremony (as per greek tradition) could not have been predicted.

IMO Brad was so enthusiastic about Deanna after his visit to her family that he let abc think that if she was the one, he would want to have Mr Pappas' presence... perhaps abc overlooked the "if", but then again DeAnna was F1... Did abc know that Brad wouldn't pick anyone and force a proposition by flying the dad over? Or were they mislead by Brad into believing until the very end that Deanna was his pick?

Thanks BoomerLady. I don't have much time to surf, but I enjoyed kicking up some dust with that post!

Someone responded to my post, I think Bloomer, pointing out that they had early on called it that bringing in the father was simply a 'cover all the bases move.' After some discussion on my post, I agree it probably was a more general contractual reason, as Bloomer said, and not as specific as my post. Nevertheless, I think we all eventually agreed that, in spite of BBFC comments ( ), there was some contractual reason why Father was brought in even if TPTB weren't sure he would be needed. Your angle also makes sense, that - TPTB were misled also. Whenever something 'just doesn't seem right' with a situation, my background tends to make me go right back to any contract for clues. If nothing else, I hope to have added this thought process to the Fort for the future. You sleuthers are so amazing, I'll never be in the same league.

I've been a lurker for years. This was first year I ever signed in to comment. I was in the kayak last season, so I never got fired up to post (boy, I was close on the two "I love you's" though..). I go back to the Trista/Ryan days - boomer that I am too- I adored Ryan. I watched just for the eye candy!

But it does seem that as the Bach seasons go on, the producers have become too meddling, and are hurting their own show. They should just let the realism play out and/or show a little more, and edit a little less. That's how reality tv in general became popular - but as the medium has matured, producers just can't leave well enough alone at some point, and keep trying to "tweak" the shows, until they've lost credibility. I think that's why DWTS and AI are still so popular - they haven't been meddled with too badly, from an editing standpoint. Maybe because people vote.- they have a higher level of ethics to adhere to (?) Maybe Bach should add some voting twist. You know, like some kind of reward (money, vacation, next bach?) goes to the favorite chosen by the audience in each episode.